Gerhard Bosch « Dismissing hours not workers – work-sharing in the economic crisis to avoid dismissals - European experiences » Workshop: Global economic crisis, innovative labour policies and the role of labour administration Prague, 2 March 2010 Prof. Dr. Gerhard Bosch Institut Arbeit und Qualifikation Forsthausweg 2, LE, 47057 Duisburg Tel.: +49 203 / 379 1827; Fax: +49 203 / 379 1809, Email: [email protected] ; http://www.iaq.uni-due.de/
Transcript
Gerhard Bosch
« Dismissing hours not workers –
work-sharing in the economic crisis to avoid dismissals - European experiences »
Workshop: Global economic crisis, innovative labour policiesand the role of labour administration
2. Development of GDP and unemployment in different OECD countries
3. Use of work-sharing in the crisis in Europe
4. Use of working time reductions in France and Germany
5. The new agreement in the German manufacturing industry 2010
6. Conclusions
Inst
itut A
rbei
t u
nd
Qu
alif
ikat
ion
1.1 Work-sharing in the crisis
• Temporary work-sharing – reversible• Main goal: retain workers• Different forms of work-sharing
– Subsized – unsubsidized– With or without wage compensation– Short-term – long-term– Negotiated – non negotiated– Voluntary – involuntary– Reduction of standard working hours vs
reduction of overtime hours• Different goals: Avoid - reduce or postpone
dismissals
Inst
itut A
rbei
t u
nd
Qu
alif
ikat
ion
1.2 Work-sharing in the crisis
• Different reactions of companies to declines in orders– reduce (1) number of employees, (2) of hours
of employees, (3) of hourly productivity• Is work-sharing = labour hoarding?
– Labour hoarding = the ‘retention by a business of more workers than are required to produce the present level of output’ Oxford Dict. of Economics)
• Working-time reductions in crisis may be a form of “underemployment” if volume of work adjusted to the lower level of ouptput
4.6 Why there is higher internal flexibility in Germany than in France (I)
Possible Explanations
- traditional use of short-time work as a mean of retention (D) not preparation of dismissal (F)
- More working time flexibilisation in German companies
- Higher volumes of credit hours and overtime before crisis in DE because of export boom
- Different business models - Business model based on skilled workers (D)/ high
investments in vocational training/ low investments in F- More specialization in diversified quality production in D
than in F
Inst
itut A
rbei
t u
nd
Qu
alif
ikat
ion
4.7 Why there is higher internal flexibility in Germany than in France (II)
Possible Explanations
- Higher internal pressure from unions/works councillors
strong rights of codetermination in D/ less rights in F
- German state uses short-time work as instrument of industrial policy/ France direct support of national champions
- Federal elections in Germany/elections in North-Rhine-Westphalia 2010: cannot be won with neoliberal programm
Inst
itut A
rbei
t u
nd
Qu
alif
ikat
ion 5 New agreement on job security in the
German engineering industry 2010
-after 12 months short-time transition in a cheaper short-time scheme: min. 6 months - yearly bonus (10,6% of yearly income) divided by 12 and added to monthly income – increase of monthly wage = increase of short-time allowance - agreement with works council - no dismissals
- after 6 months in new short-time – transition into temporary working-time reduction down to 26 hours per week - agreement with works council - no dismissals - partial wage compensation for hours (26-200% - 31-50%)
Inst
itut A
rbei
t u
nd
Qu
alif
ikat
ion
6.1 Conclusions
• Pros of work-sharing in the crisis– Immediate impact on the labour market and on costs for
companies– Bridging until fiscal packages take effects– Fine-tuning – targeting companies in trouble– Avoid dismissal and re-recruiting costs– Avoid skill shortages– Avoid scar effects of unemployment– Create ellbowroom for recruting young workers– Improve social cohesion by distributing costs more evenly
• Cons of work-sharing– Obstacle to necessary structural change– High costs
Inst
itut A
rbei
t u
nd
Qu
alif
ikat
ion
6.2 Conclusions
• Pros prevail by far, since there are no bottlenecks in the labour market for growing companies
• OECD: – Limitations of „work-first“ approach in the crisis“– Expansion of „train-first“ approach
• Also advantages in a „retain-first“ approach• The best a mixture of „train-first“ and retain-
first“ approach – since not much training during short-time
